On May 25, George Bush signed a defense bill that outlawed the construction of (new) permanent bases in Iraq. But only five days later, White House press flack Tony Snow told reporters that the president is now modeling the future of his bloody signature project on the half-century U.S. experience in South Korea, with troops in Iraq for the long haul to provide, in Snow's words, "a security presence" and to serve as a "force of stability."

~~~snip~~~

Quote:

Sanger might have called Dr. Alaa Makki, a senior official in the reliably pro-occupation Iraqi Islamic Party, for his reaction. We reached him in Baghdad, and he was taken aback to hear of the talk coming out of the White House and the Pentagon. "I haven't heard about this," he said, "and I'm very surprised they'd make such statements without consulting with the Iraqi side." After asking us to send him copies of the statements made by the White House and the Pentagon, he told us that his party is "against leaving any permanent bases in Iraq; in fact, we are for setting a timetable for a complete withdrawal of the MNF from Iraq." That was, again, a representative of the pro-occupation Iraqi Islamic Party.

Very good article by Joshua Holland and Raed Jarrar in AlterNet. Very accurate reporting. Apparently we don't bother to ask how the Iraqis feel, we just make decisions for them.

We can't leave, they haven't turned over the oil yet. When they do? Oh well, of course we can't leave then.....we have to protect 'our' interests.

I'd say, the embassy is the true symbol of what we should be studying. Why? the largest in the world? Why? 11- foot- thick walls? Why swimming pools, volleyball courts, tennis courts, ambassador's living quarters 16,000 sq. ft.? Why 107 acres in the middle of Baghdad and right on the Tigres river? Why their own electricity and water? Didn't we pay to have a good water, electricity, and sewer systems for all of Baghdad? Most of all what does this say to the 2,000,000 Iraqi refugee, out of Iraq? The 2,000,000 displaced and homeless Iraqis? To the nearly 1,000,000 dead Iraqi's families? What does this say to all Iraqis, that this could be built while they die violent deaths, from starvation, lack of everyday medical necessities, from waterborne diseases and pollution, from uranium poisoning, raw sewerage, lack of drinking water and electricity?

What does it say when this monstrocity is being built by foriegn workers, while Iraqis suffer 50- 70% unemployment? While they can't get the bare necessities built, as promised by the USA and the Iraqi pupppet government?

Built on time and within budget!!! Evil bastards!

Well, I can't tell you with absolute sureity. what the Iraqis think, but I can tell you that it reeks of arrogant, imperialistic, oppression and colonialism.

No dori, I think about it all of the time. I also think and hope for the best for Cuba, Venezula, Bolivia, Guatemala, East Timor, Africa, Lebanon, and Palistine. The Amazon natives, the Artic natives and so many more.

Every time I see governments using American made weapons, paid for by the US taxpayers with foreign military aid, against their own people and Israel using phosphorus, cluster, and depleted uranium bombs against Lebanon and Palistine, Indonesia using American weapons against East Timor and Ache' (misp?), and then listen to the trumpted up charges that Iran and Syria are interfering in their own 'backyard', I think of the hypocrosy of our leaders.

Why should the opinions of the conquered people matter to the conquerors? This attitude is nothing new. The British, after all, did not bother to ask the Indians (East Indians, that is) if they thought the occupation of their country was a good idea or not. Nor did the British care what the Irish thought of the occupation of their country. And Rome sure as hell didn't give two tugs of a dead dog's cock what their conquered provinces thought of the occupation of their lands.

BAGHDAD, May 11 — A majority of Iraq’s Parliament members have signed a petition for a timetable governing a withdrawal of American troops, several legislators said Friday.

The withdrawal would depend on the growth and maturity of the Iraqi security forces, to ensure that the departure would not create a security vacuum and accelerate the sectarian conflict, the petition’s sponsors said.

“The troop withdrawal would move in parallel with the buildup of Iraqi troops, but their stay should not be for a long time,” said Saleh al-Igili, a member of the parliamentary bloc allied with the anti-American Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr, which sponsored the petition.

Officials with Mr. Sadr’s bloc said 144 of Parliament’s 275 members — including Sunnis, Shiites and at least one Kurd — had signed. The document is being developed into a draft bill by Parliament’s legal and foreign relations committees, said Bahaa al-Araji, a member of the Sadr bloc and head of the legal committee.

The petition formalizes a widely held sentiment among many legislators — and among Iraqis in general — that American troops should withdraw as soon as possible, though not before Iraqi forces are prepared to assume control of the country’s security. ...

Is our blind desire to "win" in Iraq, trump an Iraqi desire for us to leave so that they can "win" some calm?

And recently members of Iraq's parliament reconfirmed their resolve to see US troops withdraw.

A majority of Iraqi lawmakers say renewal requests not ratified by the parliament are illegal.

On Tuesday, the Bush administration and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki pushed a resolution through the U.N. Security Council extending the mandate that provides legal cover for foreign troops to operate in Iraq for another year.

The move violated both the Iraqi constitution and a law passed earlier this year by the Iraqi parliament -- the only body directly elected by all those purple-finger-waving Iraqis in 2005 -- and it defied the will of around 80 percent of the Iraqi population.

Earlier in the week, a group representing a majority of lawmakers in Iraq's parliament -- a group made up of Sunni, Shiite and secular leaders -- sent a letter to the Security Council, a rough translation of which reads: "We reject in the strongest possible terms the unconditional renewal of the mandate and ask for clear mechanisms to obligate all foreign troops to completely withdrawal from Iraq according to an announced timetable."...